If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: Petition: Direct the EPA to ban the use of Neonicotinoid pesticides

Originally Posted by borderbeeman

For goodness sake - Julian Little is Bayer's Chief Propagandist! What do you think he's going to say? He's the manufacturer of the worst bee-killing pestiticides on the planet. Are you seriously suggesting he has no 'conflict of interest' in saying that neonics have no case to answer?

"

He make work for Bayer, but he is a Scientist, with more testing and knowledge and IQ points than most of us here. I tend to belive those who test rather than squawk....

Re: Petition: Direct the EPA to ban the use of Neonicotinoid pesticides

Originally Posted by gmcharlie

He make work for Bayer, but he is a Scientist, with more testing and knowledge and IQ points than most of us here. I tend to belive those who test rather than squawk....

The European Food Safety Agency considered more than 55 peer-reviewed Science studies before recommending a ban. Buglife - the conservation charity looked at those 55 studies (including Bayer's) and assigned them a value of 1 or 2.

Category 1 was all the studies which concluded that neonics were responsible for the wave of global bee deaths
Category 2 was all the studies which gave neonics a free pass.

96% of the studies fell into category one: i.e. they concluded neonics ARE responsible for CCD/ mass bee deaths
4% gave neonics a free pass to the profit margin.

Every one of the 96% of studies that said neonics were responsible was either INDEPENDENT or government funded
All of the 4% that exonerated neonics were funded by Bayer & Syngenta - i.e. they found their own poisons 'not guilty'.

Do we ask Ford or Toyota to rule on the safety of their own cars? no we ask an independent transport agency/
Do we ask Philip Morris to tell us whether Tobacco causes cancer? No we ask the American Surgeon General
Do we ask Boeing to decide on whether the Dreamliner batteries are safe? No we ask the Federal Aviation Authority

Allowing a pesticide manufacturer to tell us whether he thinks his poisons are safe for bees or children is like asking a drug dealer whether heroin is safe for kids.

All of this retrospective debate is missing the entire point. Bayer should have PROVEN their pesticides were safe BEFORE they were given a license; they didn't and the EPA - headed up by a Monsanto Exec - gave them a rubber stamp on Clothianidin, despite the EPA's own scientists telling them NOT to license it because of its extreme toxicity for honey bees.

Over 16,000 new pesticides have been licensed by the EPA since 1980 using the 'conditional registration' loophole (no testing).
It's a total joke. They may as well sack all the EPA staff and give the janitor a rubber stamp - and tell him just to OK anything that comes in the door. That is exactly what happens now; nothing ever gets turned down. There is no 'regulation'.

Re: Petition: Direct the EPA to ban the use of Neonicotinoid pesticides

Originally Posted by borderbeeman

For goodness sake - Julian Little is Bayer's Chief Propagandist! What do you think he's going to say? He's the manufacturer of the worst bee-killing pestiticides on the planet. Are you seriously suggesting he has no 'conflict of interest' in saying that neonics have no case to answer?

Okay, let's follow your logic. So what are you? I'd say you're one of the Anti-Neonic Chief Propogandists. What do you think we expect you to say. You're convinced Neonics are the worst bee-killing pesticides on the planet. Are we to believe that there's no "conflict of interest" in saying that neonics are the not cause of all of your claims? You may not be paid directly but to your ego the accolades from others who swallow the punch you serve is payment enough.

You've staked your life on this, no matter what results are found you'll never back down off of this. Your rants make you look manic and unstable. You do more to hurt your cause than help. But that's fine, your cause is bunk and you're doing a better job showing it than those who disagree could. I'm certain this is one of those attack dog defences you were prattling on about earlier, but I'm not certain which one. I was busy cashing my checks from Monsanto, Bayer and whatever other boogieman paranoa you're attacking others on.

Re: Petition: Direct the EPA to ban the use of Neonicotinoid pesticides

Originally Posted by D Coates

Okay, let's follow your logic. So what are you? I'd say you're one of the Anti-Neonic Chief Propogandists. What do you think we expect you to say. You're convinced Neonics are the worst bee-killing pesticides on the planet. Are we to believe that there's no "conflict of interest" in saying that neonics are the not cause of all of your claims?

You've staked your life on this, no matter what results are found you'll never back down off of this. Your rants make you look manic and unstable. You do more to hurt your cause than help. But that's fine, your cause is bunk and you're doing a better job showing it than those who disagree could. I'm certain this is one of those attack dogs you were prattling on about earlier, but I'm not certain which one. I was busy cashing my checks from Monsanto, Bayer and whatever other boogieman paranoa you're attacking others on.

I have not 'staked my life on this': I just can't abide being lied to, when I know the Science is correct - and good enough for 27 European countries to have banned these nerve agent poisons from the food supply.

I can't imagine what your 'agenda' is, other than that you defend the continuing use of systemic neonitonoids:

passionately
vehemently
consistenly
persistently

all the time.

My only agenda here is the truth - and wanting to live in the country I grew up in, where bees, birds, butterflies and frogs can still exist. I don't want to live in the world that you and Bayer and Monsanto and Syngenta seem to want: a country without any of those creatures, where the only value of any kind is 'the bottom line'.

Bees are the canary in the coalmine, and if people don't wake up and realise what is going on, a lot more than bees is at stake.

By the way, if anyone is 'ranting' around here, I would say that is the pot calling the kettle black. Have you looked in the mirror lately - that's a ranter there if ever I saw one.

Re: Petition: Direct the EPA to ban the use of Neonicotinoid pesticides

I am interested in the exact nature of the conflict of interest accused in the previous posts. just exactly what is known about borderbeeman and his interests that causes a conflict of interest? As far as I can tell there is only one interest and that is providing evidence that Nics are responsible for bee deaths. his opponents than attempt to inflate or distort this fact by saying it is this or that. in fact it is none of those things. it is nothing more than evidence submitted. those that oppose consistently cannot address those evidences but choose to attack the messenger. They want to distort the issue with comments such as "That is nto proof that nics cause CCD" when the information was never submitted as proof of anything. it was submitted as evidence that it might be. I find such distortions intentionally deceitful and those that use them liars. So you may want to tend to your credibility with as much insight as you tend to others.

I do not agree with every word that comes out of the mouth of those that oppose nics. But I do not agree with one of the words coming form the other point of view. I have not heard an intelligent credible defense of the accusations toward Bayer yet. It is unreasonable to assume a pesticide will harm bees? No. Should it be required that Bayer proves that their do not? Yes. Have they? No. they have nice little dance they do around the fire but nothing else.

Re: Petition: Direct the EPA to ban the use of Neonicotinoid pesticides

Originally Posted by Daniel Y

They want to distort the issue with comments such as "That is nto proof that nics cause CCD" when the information was never submitted as proof of anything. it was submitted as evidence that it might be.

Except that is not what is being claimed by border.

96% of the studies fell into category one: i.e. they concluded neonics ARE responsible for CCD/ mass bee deaths

...not much wiggle room there to claim that they "might be", when the claim is that they "ARE".

deknow

"Imagine a world in which we are all enlightened by objective truths rather than offended by them."Neil Tyson

Re: Petition: Direct the EPA to ban the use of Neonicotinoid pesticides

Science proceeds by publication in peer-reviewed journals; in other words, a scientist must have his theory criticised and taken apart and put back together again by his peers - his fellow scientists. Only if it 'stacks up' after that criticism is it accepted for publication.
However, it is almost impossible to get a scientist to ever say : "this causes this - and I have 100% proof"

It does happen but it is far more common that after a couple of years of work, a scientist will say:

well we studied CCD and we found that neonics kill bees in the lab at doses of 3parts per billion;
neonics are present in pollen and nectar of canola and corn at 3ppb to 5ppb
and we see the bees bringing back large amounts of canola and corn pollen
and we see hives collapse when exposed to these crops

but you will never get them to say neonics cause CCD - because there is always another 'factor' to look at.

The Science Debate is in fact a deliberate diversionary tactic on the part of pesticide manufacturers.
They know that you can ALWAYS get a scientist to pick holes in another study. The process never ends.

The French beekeepers knew within a week that neonic treated sunflowers killed a million bee colonies; they were there; they saw it happen; it had never happened before; and they found imidacloprid in the sunflower nectar, in the pollen, in the dead bees, in the bee-bread, in the nurse bees, in the larvae. It was everywhere.

So they took a science-based decision and banned the neonics in France. CCD stopped.

They had varroa and viruses in France for 30 years before CCD arrived in1994. They still have varroa and viruses, but since they banned neoncs, they have no CCD.

Re: Petition: Direct the EPA to ban the use of Neonicotinoid pesticides

Should I tend to read bibles, and 96% are Christian and 4% are korans, guess which one??

Asigning a value to a document and claiming you read more of one than the other is ludicrous. Science is not a popularity contest. its facts....... and the facts in this case are simple... all the testing i have seen that "prove neonics are bad" involve acute doses, captive bees and single source feedings. same as if you lock me in a liquor store........ all the once that show normal field testing and realistic exposures show nothing.... and MILLIONS of real world hives here in the midwest in both countries show the same.... an occasional drink will not kill me.... steady diet of nothing else will

As for Ford and Boeing.... the ruling bodies on those companines have done NOTHING but regulate.. both of them are innovators........ and when you study closely tobacco (and yes it was a scam on the us... in the 50s and 60s the surgeon general supported it... so claiming some "supior knowledge" of a ruling body is the definition of insanity

And the coupe de gra?? the comete its called "Bug life"?????? Like asking PETA to rate roast beef sandwiches.........!

Hey, wait a second... which of the Four (or is it Five now?) Dog defenses did you use on me that time? I sure hope I'm getting them all. I get paid ovetime by Bayer, Monsanto and Syngenta if I collect all five!

Re: Petition: Direct the EPA to ban the use of Neonicotinoid pesticides

borderbeeman you have started 79 treads, all which has something to do with pesticides. That sound like ranting to me.
Can we start a petition to ban borderbeeman from this site. I live in the middle of the corn belt and have had no problems.

Re: Petition: Direct the EPA to ban the use of Neonicotinoid pesticides

Originally Posted by Birdman

borderbeeman you have started 79 treads, all which has something to do with pesticides. That sound like ranting to me.
Can we start a petition to ban borderbeeman from this site. I live in the middle of the corn belt and have had no problems.

No, silencing people is usually if not always the worst way to go about things. Borderbeeman may or may not be wrong about neonicotinoids being the primary cause of bee-dying - I take particular exception to his seeming cavalier dismissal of varroa mites as a serious threat to bees - but if he really does think those chemicals are killing bees, I certainly can't criticize him for campaigning zealously against them. Were I convinced that was the problem, I hope I would react the same way.

He has to be helped to understand that there's room for discussion about this; that the issue is far from settled. And he has to understand that the other people here care about bees too, and aren't "the enemy". He will come to understand neither if he's just kicked out.

Beeless since 2012; coming back in 2014. Suffering from apicultural withdrawal!

Re: Petition: Direct the EPA to ban the use of Neonicotinoid pesticides

I don't know whether you have noticed - but THIS part of the Forum is called:

CCD and Pesticides Discussion.

What did you expect to find here?

A discussion about the ancient origins of Neolithic Hioney Hunters in the Namib Desert?
How about the origins of the name 'Beowulf' - the first great hero to ever have his name written down in English, in the 6the Century - it means Bee Wolf in Olde English.

I came here to share with you a European and global perspective on the emerging science and ne regulatory actions on the issue of neonicotinoids and bee deaths; they were recently BANNED in 27 countries - did you notice?

Glad you have no bee problems in the corn belt. Strange that my bee farmer friend from the Mid West just lost 2,100 out of 3,200 hives this Spring, which he attributes to his bee stocking up on corn pollen in an area just like yours.

Re: Petition: Direct the EPA to ban the use of Neonicotinoid pesticides

Originally Posted by melliferal

No, silencing people is usually if not always the worst way to go about things. Borderbeeman may or may not be wrong about neonicotinoids being the primary cause of bee-dying - I take particular exception to his seeming cavalier dismissal of varroa mites as a serious threat to bees - but if he really does think those chemicals are killing bees, I certainly can't criticize him for campaigning zealously against them. Were I convinced that was the problem, I hope I would react the same way.

He has to be helped to understand that there's room for discussion about this; that the issue is far from settled. And he has to understand that the other people here care about bees too, and aren't "the enemy". He will come to understand neither if he's just kicked out.

Pleae believe me I do not regard the overwhelming majority of people here as 'the enemy'. I do think that the application of the rules on reasoned debate on thi Forum seems to be very erratic and very partial.
I get 'moderated' permanently, merely for defending myself against constant personal attacks - but the attackers are actually ENCOURAGED by the Moderator.

Just a small correction I don't 'dismiss varroa mites' at all. The point is that Pettis's discovery and Cedric Alaux's discovery give a perfect explanation/ hypothesis as to why bees, whose immune systems have been destroyed by neonics, will succumb to varroa, viruses, bacteria and fungal infections.

Neonics are the HIV of the bee world.

My varroa -education began with Bayer's Bayvarol strips in 1998, and they worked until the varroa became resistant.
I then tried Thymol patties - and that worked. Oxalic Acid became standard treatment here around 2005 and Formic Acid came in around 2010.

Formic Acid evaporation works extremely well - it kills varroa in sealed cells and - as as I can judge it does not harm the bees or the queens if used properly. I strongly recommend everyone check out Formic Acid treatment for varroa.
It works so well that if used twice a year - in Spring and again in Autumn, I rarely even see more than a few varroa these days. in 1998 when I first got hit I had thousands in one hive. However, it still did not die and recovered quite well.

“Of the 33 papers that could be categorised 31 (94%) of the papers contained evidence that neonicotinoids would or could have significant environmental impacts above and beyond what was previously known. Only two (6%) of the studies provide reassuring evidence that neonicotinoids are not damaging the environment or not likely to damage the environment.”

So, maybe it wasn’t, 55 papers but 33.

Additionally from the same group:

“Methods

We have reviewed the 41 papers and put them into two categories –

1) Study suggests worrying environmental impacts above and beyond what was known when we produced our 2009 report

2) 2) Study suggests no effect or an effect that indicates that environmental impacts are lower than expected.

In addition a number of papers were considered where either the outcome was not conclusively in category 1 or 2 or the experimental methodology was flawed or clearly not relevant to the real world.”

Okay, so maybe the number of papers was not 55 or 33 but 41, at this point, who knows?

Then let us look at the first two “1’s which by The Charity’s guidelines “suggest a worrying environmental impact”

First study listed as a “1” was titled “Interactions between Nosema microspores and a neonicotinoid weaken honeybees”

The study concludes that: “Our results demonstrated interactive effects between microsporidia and pesticides that weaken honeybee health.”
Just for information, the Nosema only infected bees died at rates of about 29% while the neonicotinoid exposed bees died at a rate of about 16%. Bees that saw neither died at a rate of about 6%. Those exposed to both died at rates of about 46%. (After 10 days). Incidentally, when infected with Nosema, the bees consumed more of the tainted sucrose, which undoubtedly led to additional doses of neonicotinoid. So in effect the major contributor to mortality was the Nosema, not the imidacloprid.

Also from an article in American Bee Journal and Bee Culture that looked at the first study (Alaux et al.): http://bees.msu.edu/2011/effects-of-...nd-physiology/
“Alaux et al. (2010) studied whether a neonicotinoid (imidacloprid) and Nosema (a mixture of both species) would show a synergistic interaction in affecting honey bees. They found that the combination of both agents caused the highest mortality and food consumption.”

From the same paper:

“In a more recent study, Vidau et al. (2011) found a similar synergistic effect between pesticides and N. Ceranae. After being exposed to sublethal doses of fipronil or thiacloprid, N. ceranae-infected bees showed a higher mortality than in uninfected ones.”
So this tells us that other pesticides that are approved for use result in the same mortality to bees as does the neonicotinoid. So the study in effect says that the neonicotinoids have no more effect than do other approved pesticides that our bees encounter in the field. Pesticides that will most likely be used to replace the neonicotinoids.

“Oral thiamethoxam delivered at the highest dose (one-fifth of the LD50 corresponding to 30 _g/L) had no significant effect on mortality. Similarly, chronic oral exposure of honeybees to either imidacloprid or its plant metabolites induced no lethal effect at concentrations of 20 and 40 _g/L [26]. Acetamiprid 1 _g/bee (one-tenth of the LD50) induced the highest observed mortality level (30%), but this level was not statistically different from that of the control group.”

Also from the study:

“However, we failed to find any relevant biological effect of thiamethoxam on the honeybee after acute sublethal treatment [20], and we observed only a limited impairment of sucrose sensitivity and olfactory learning after chronic treatment (present study).”

So after looking at the first two studies that the Charity rated “1”, troubling, neither has anything really conclusive that indicates that neonicotinoids are worse than what they will be replaced with.

It appears to me some sensationalism and number inflation on the anti-neonicotinoids group part. Don’t misunderstand me, they may be right in the end. But for the first two studies, we would be better served dealing with N. Ceranae, than worrying about neonicotinoids. It really appears that the newer more virulent strain of Nosema combines its effects on top of ANY pesticide load to lead to colony death. This is not a smoking gun for CCD. In reality it appears that neonicotinoids are less harmful to honeybees than many of the alternatives.

Re: Petition: Direct the EPA to ban the use of Neonicotinoid pesticides

Less harmful is certainly still harmful; but it seems to me the battle needs to be taken to nosema.

The biggest problem with focusing solely on neonicotinoids is that it's basically misleading. There doesn't appear to be anything special about "neonics" compared to other pesticides. Whether neonicotinoids stay or go, the larger group of "pesticides" will continue to kill bees because, well, that's what pesticides do; so we need to be doing more to raise awareness of pesticides in general. What's going to happen when neonicotinoids are put on long-term moratorium because of our efforts, and bee deaths don't plummet significantly (beyond typical deviations) because everyone simply replaces them with other pesticides that kill just as easily? What's going to happen is our Bayer(etc) friends are going to say "see, obviously there was nothing wrong with neonicotinoids", and seriously, how could anybody argue? Consequently, we'll have a whole 'nuther mountain to climb whenever we as the bee industry make claims about any other substance; we'll lack credibility.

Challenging agrichem companies directly by pushing for regulation might not be the best or only way to go. Perhaps we should try to appeal more to farmers themselves, and get them to use less pesticide overall, no matter what precisely it is that they use. They recognize the value of bees and will be more receptive because they aren't on the defensive.

Beeless since 2012; coming back in 2014. Suffering from apicultural withdrawal!

Re: Petition: Direct the EPA to ban the use of Neonicotinoid pesticides

Originally Posted by borderbeeman

I don't know whether you have noticed - but THIS part of the Forum is called:

CCD and Pesticides Discussion.

What did you expect to find here?

A discussion about the ancient origins of Neolithic Hioney Hunters in the Namib Desert?
How about the origins of the name 'Beowulf' - the first great hero to ever have his name written down in English, in the 6the Century - it means Bee Wolf in Olde English.

I came here to share with you a European and global perspective on the emerging science and ne regulatory actions on the issue of neonicotinoids and bee deaths; they were recently BANNED in 27 countries - did you notice?

Glad you have no bee problems in the corn belt. Strange that my bee farmer friend from the Mid West just lost 2,100 out of 3,200 hives this Spring, which he attributes to his bee stocking up on corn pollen in an area just like yours.

I assumed you'd avoid answering the question on the "chemtrail theory" you champion as well. I'm showing that another theory you strongly support with "supporting scientific data" as also all flash and no bang. It shows a pattern where you can't consider you're wrong there either.

Which Dog defense did I use that time? I've got B and I. If I can get N, G, and O, I get my overtime pay!